https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutions_of_1989
China continues to be socialist because they killed everyone who protested. Even despite slaughtering their own people at Tiananmen Square. China is more capitalist today than ever. In fact the majority of 'stuff' coming from China is being produced in capitalist zones like Shenzhen.
>“Politically Correct” was never part of a rebranding effort on the left,
The rest of your post is basically just trying to deny the rebranding. The problem with rebranding is that when the old brand dies, the adherents say 'oh we were never that' that's in essence the point of rebranding.
Here's the reality. Socialism is dying worldwide. Here in Canada for example, tons of government monopolies have gone private. Telus, Petro-Canada, CNR, Various electricity entities, road repairs and in some cases even the roads themselves.
The wind is blowing that direction and the world governments will divest themselves out of their socialism eventually.
Globalism is still there but is also dying. The problem with rebranding efforts is that it makes the subject difficult. In essence globalism was a failed attempt to destroy borders and have no immigration as a subject. Have just 1 global government and only 1 set of laws.
The reason why globalism has essentially failed is because you can never in a million years do this without force. The country that doesn't go along with it becomes wealthy by not being it.
Globalization is the the antithesis of globalism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internationalism_(politics)
In terms of internationalism it's just another brand of socialism that failed. There's no need to use another word because it's correct. Nobody today goes by the term because it's dead as socialism is.
You had a question and I answered in good faith. I accept your concession.
Socialism didn't die in 1989. What is that even supposed to mean?
> They started their rebranding effort. They became Politically Correct
“Politically Correct” was never part of a rebranding effort on the left, it was originally a pejorative used between different groups in the left, and adopted heavily as a pejorative by the right against the left in about the early 1980s, serving the same purpose as “cancel culture” does today (like, literally, anything the right says about “cancel culture” today can pretty much have that term swapped out for “political correctness” and be a quote from the right in the 1980s-1990s.)
> "democratic socialists",
“Democratic Socialist” isn't part of a post-1989 rebranding. The DSA itself was founded in 1982, and the “democratic socialist” label is older (one of the DSAs predecessor organizations was the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee.)
> culutural marxists,
“Cultural Marxism” isn't a post-1989 left-wing rebranding, it's a right-wing conspiracy theory. No one on the left identifies or brands themselves or any movement they are part of as “cultural marxism”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_...
> globalists
Again, not a left-wing rebranding; pretty much no one identifies/brands with globalism, and globalism is a term used both on the left- and far-right to refer to and critique an aspect of neoliberal capitalism (a center-right ideology).
> internationalists
Again, not a post-1989 left rebranding. Leftist “internationalism” historically has referred to association with one of the Communist Internationals (though it pretty much fell out of useful use with the overlapping, competing, Stalinist Third and Trotskyite Fourth Internationals before WWII, and the subsequent schism within the Fourth International. More recently, the left has been more prone to use “internationalism” as part of a term of critique with regard to liberal (centrist to center-right) internationalism, though even that negative use has largely been replaced with criticism of neoliberal “globalism”.